IMPEACH GEORGE BUSH!! The Bulldog Manifesto Lack of Accountability: Nobody Gets Fired. Everybody Gets Promoted. - The Bulldog Manifesto

« Home | Freedom.....to be Naked? » | The Republican Scandal Scorecard » | The Country Goes Right: Sandra Day Appears Left » | Bush Wants "Further Study" Regarding His Own Accou... » | When Does Loving the Flag Become Flag Idolatry? » | The Speech George W. Bush SHOULD Make Tonight » | Author of the Flag Burning Amendment Takes Bribes... » | Anthrax-- Terrorist Plot Against the Left? » | The Men, Women, and Children of Fallujah » | Liberal for a Day....Alan Greenspan? » 

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

Lack of Accountability: Nobody Gets Fired. Everybody Gets Promoted.



If we have learned anything from the Bush administration, its that mediocrity will be rewarded.....BIG TIME!

Remember our former CIA Director, George Tenet? Do you remember the day when the four planes were hijacked and flown into buildings, and all those people died? That day, well, it happened on Tenet's watch. After all, he was the head of our central intelligence agency, right?

Oh yeah, I forgot, wasn't he also the head of the CIA during that time when somebody in our own government sent killer anthrax spores in the mail to two Democratic Senators and certain members of the "liberal media"?

Most people would get fired for failing so badly at their job. What happened to Tenet? He won the Medal Of Freedom. Funny thing though, the medal was so important that it was bestowed upon Tenet by King George himself. Ah yes, Tenet, a true hero!

And what about Dr. Condi Rice? Wasn't she the President's National Security Advisor during 9/11? Didn't the 9/11 Commission tell us that Bush's national security leadership (including Rice and Tenet) met formally nearly 100 times in the months prior to the Sept. 11 attacks, yet terrorism was the topic during only two of those sessions? How could she be so unconcerned with terrorism? Didn't Clinton and Richard Clarke (former Clinton and Bush counter-terrorism chief) brief George W. about the danger of al-Qaeda before Clinton left office? Wasn't Dr. Condi aware of the bombing of the Khobar Towers and the USS Cole? So why only 2 in 100 meetings? That seems a tad low, right?

Such an oversight would surely cost the head of National Security her job, right? Nope, instead Condi was rewarded with the job of Secretary of State. Congratulations Condi!

What about Alberto Gonzalez? There is a man who, acting as the president's general counsel, advised the president to ignore the Geneva Conventions and basically torture whomever "we" deem necessary to fight the "war on terror". Sounds kind of ironic, right? Gonzalez basically advised the President to partake in terror in order to fight terror. Inevitably, such advise becomes part of the leitmotif of the United States military campaign, eventually makings its way to Iraq, manifesting itself at Abu Ghraib in a perversely diabolical display of Good Troops, Gone Bad.

So what does Gonzalez get for his ruthlessly authoritarian advise? He gets promoted to the position of Attorney General, and they are actually talking about Gonzalez as being a potential "moderate" choice for Supreme Court nominee. (Side rant: When did this country become so freaking fascist that Alberto Gonzalez is considered a moderate? What did I miss? The guy supports torture! HELLO!! This is moderate? Wake up people! If he is a moderate then we need to take a serious look at what we have become.) (Side rant #2: If somebody ever calls him Honorbale Judge Gonzalez, I might have to vomit.)

And lastly, we have Halliburton. Kickbacks, gasoline overcharges, meal overcharges, antiquated costs controls, cooking the books, bribing foreign officials in violation of law, pension plundering, dealings with Rogue States, abuser of corporate welfare....here is a company that takes out advertising time to convince us about how thoughtful and caring they are. But in reality, here is a company that has stolen more money from American taxpayers than one can count, and what happened to Halliburton yesterday? They got rewarded with another government contract. This one is worth $5 billion dollars! They sure do deserve it, right?

You see, in this administration mediocrity won't get you fired, it will make you rich!!!

E-mail this post



Remember me (?)



All personal information that you provide here will be governed by the Privacy Policy of Blogger.com. More...

I wish I could fail miserably at my job and keep getting promotions!!!

Hey I would be like a manager!!

great post!

I think we have a very similar take on the workings (shortcomings) of the bush administration. Here are a few posts of interest:
http://love-the-exception.blogspot.com/2005/06/frightening-absurdities.html

I've been looking for a promotion, and now I know how to get one.

It is a shameful time to be a Republican Right Now. I truly hope that soon my Republican Friends will feel the love of Christ in their hearts and reach out to the world and start leading by example rather than simply offering up empty rhetoric and the politics of division.

yada yada yada...I wonder how much you bitched during the Clinto years...

Paul,

Actually, I did "bitch" during the Clinton years because the Right was ruthlessly going after a president for lying about a sex act. Yes, it was bad, but not a high crime. They spent millions of dollars on an independent investigation which brought NOTHING back.

Our current president lied for the purpose of sending people to die. Big difference, my friend. Our current president didn't even want to support an investigation of 9/11, then after finally giving in, didn't want to fund it, then he didn't want to cooperate with it. BIG DIFFERENCE.

If ever there was a need for an investigation, it is now. Its certainly at-issue as to whether this president lied for the purpose of going to war. Where is your incredulity? I'm sure you would be pretty pissed if he had a (D) next to his name.

Just wait until history judges this president. You will be embarassed you ever supported this bastard.

Until then...yada yada yada.....

Well you know it starts at the top. Just look at the shrub himself. Talk about 'mediocrity'. He was never the best and the brightest. He was not even the 'chosen son'. He simply happened to be the oldest son. And probably the easiest to be manipulated. Then look at Rove and Cheney. Both hanger-on's who never achieved any kind of personal success, but instead rode into town on someone else's coattails.
Now that they've found themselves in a position to do so they are going to reward as many of their peers as possible.

hey paul I am always bitching.

tracy v - middle managment is for screw ups with to much sneority to get rid of

Great post

We're dealing with an administration that clearly does not believe that they are accountable. They do everything in total secrecy and expect the American people to keep eating it. I am amazed on a daily basis when I see the comparisons between this administration and the start of the takeover of Germany by Hitler. The signs are the same people. First, you create fear in the people by creating an enemy (Hitler burned the Reichstag), then you blame it on someone else. (hmmm...twin towers possibly) Next, you take that fear and run with it. That is the perfect opportunity to change all of the written rules; we know them as the constitution. With that out of the way, you are then capable of continuing to perpetuate the fear propoganda against a false enemy in the name of protecting it's citizens. At that point, you have all the tools at hand to create a police state. (hmmm....National I.D. Cards, Government Camps already built and staffed, Control of the Internet...)
There is a really good documentary out called, I believe, the Blindspot. It is an interview with Hitler's personal secretary, who has since died. She even stated in the doc that most Germans thought he was a babbling idiot and so they paid no attention to him. Most were caught off-guard when everything went down.
Look at it this way, any country in the world, that elects a former presidents son as the current president, is not a democracy. We like to think that we are democratic, but it's past that now-Black Box voting and all.
If you are currently reading this post on a pc (not mac), you know how unsecure pc's are, how they crash, how easy it is to write malicious code and all that. That's the software we're using in the Diebold 'voting machines'. Ha! Talk about manipulating the vote.
Keep it going Bulldog. You're the man!

Tennet got the medal because Bush is trying to buy him off and keep him silent over the Valarie Plame/CIA affair. The CIA is real pissed with the way Bush has been screwing up Iraq and the war on terror. The reason Tennet quit so suddenly (in the middle of the night!) was so he would be free to testify AGAINST Bush and his cabinet.

Read the details HERE.

k.,

That is quite an article.

The Bulldog Manifesto

Regarding Tenet, I think you are being a bit unfair. The perview of the CIA is outside of the USA. Now I realize that the 9/11 people came from outside of the country but they spent a lot of time within the States before 9/11. Their flight training took place within the country. Their casing of airports and planes and flight-crew activities, etc. all took place within the country. The CIA had no jurisdiction over any of these activities. The best chance that we had of foiling the 9/11 plot rested with the FBI, an organization over which Tenet had no influence.

Do I let Tenet off of the hook for 9/11? Not altogether. It's just not nearly so obvious what position the CIA was in to prevent 9/11--well, not to me, anyway. Remember, the CIA and FBI were prevented from sharing information by the so called wall of separation between secret service types and crime prevention types.

Bulldog,

What is your reasoning whereby you conclude that the Anthrax letters were mailed by someone in the Government? Oh, and by the way, the CIA has no jurisdiction within the USA therefore blaming them for failure to resolve the Anthrax case seems particularly inapt. If it was someone in our government, the CIA was nowhere near the investigation.

About Condi, I actually think that she is better off in the State Department. I don't defend her failures, whatever they may be, as National Security Advisor but diplomacy seems to be her metier.

Actually, the Geneva Conventions themselves suggest that the detainees do not qualify for the protections of the Geneva Conventions. That does not make it open season for torture of detainees, which actions I deplore, however, I do think that there is value in exploring every idea concerning gathering intelligence that might prevent another 9/11 or bring those responsible for 9/11 to justice. If that includes discussing torture, I have no problem with that discussion--as long as torture is rejected at the end of that discussion.

As for Gonzalez as a moderate, you might remember his comments concerning one of Bush's nominees. He was said to have called her reasoning about requiring parental consent before a minor may obtain an abortion 'activist'. By 'activist', he did not mean 'Liberal activism' but 'Conservative activism'. Frankly, I think Gonzalez would be a poor choice for the SCOTUS.

Bush does seem to be loyal to a fault and I am not really defending keeping any of these people on or promoting them, for that matter. I just have a predictably different point of view on the whole thing.

Halliburton is totally on it's own, as far as I am concerned. They will need to defend themselves.

Craig,

Check out THIS for my anthrax article.

After the news came out that the anthrax came from an American source, the story went underground, Craig. In the early days of the story, when the story was about al-Qaeda, this was a front page story. But since it has been determined to be home grown, the story and the investigation have been veiled in secrecy.

Here is the Washington Post article about the source of the anthrax spores.

Another interesting article is this one..

Okay, Bulldog, I'm pretty well convinced. What about my other comments?

Craig,

Regarding Tenet, true, when the CIA was set up, it was set up for the purposes of international intelligence. Somewhere along the line, however, the CIA has become very involved in intelligence matters that venture into the United States yet have international implications.

From Wikipedia:
"While collection of foreign intelligence on U.S. citizenry has always been prohibited by its charter, the restrictions and oversight of the 1970s cut into the CIA's intelligence-gathering powers at home. Any such operation against a U.S. citizen must fall within its counterespionage or antiterrorist purview and requires senior approval, up to and including the Director of National Intelligence or the Attorney General for certain operations."

Because terrorism is considered an international phenomenon, the CIA gets involved in domestic investigations so long as they relate to counterterrorism.

As the head of the CIA, I think its only fair to put some blame on Tenet. The truth is, we had the data that could have stopped 9/11 before 9/11. For whatever reason (negligence, or perhaps inentional), the data was not acted upon.

The only person who ever apologized for 9/11 was counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke, yet he was the only person urging Bush to take terrorism more seriously prior to 9/11.

As for Condi, I dont trust her at all. I'm glad she is out of NSA, but I dont like her in State. I'd prefer her in a position on Energy. Heck, I'd say the only qualification any of the Bush cadre have is knowledge of Big Oil.

As for Gonzalez. I'm glad he said what you say he said. Thats refreshing. But I dont think there is any room on our Supreme Court for somebody who condoned torture. I cannot think of anything more repugnant to American ideals than torturing a human being, regardless of their crimes.

About the anthrax, dont you find it remarkable that the Anthrax letters were mailed one week after 9/11. Dont you find it remarkable that they were sent, for the most part, to two democrat senators and parties whom the extreme right had called out as "liberal media "? What about the fact that the anthrax attack had to be planned well in advance of 9/11? Was it just coincidence? Opportunism? Or perhaps, something in concert?

Why have they hidden this news item? Why was the White House put on CIPRO on 9/11, two weeks before the nation even knew about the anthrax attack, and one week before it was mailed? Why was Bush's dad meeting with the Bin Laden family on the morning of 9/11? Why did Bush do everything possible to stop a 9/11 commission?

Why does Bush invoke 9/11 every chance he gets? Why aren't they doing the things that would actually protect us from terrorism? Protecting the borders? Investing in the Coast Guard (rather than taking away funding) Protecting nuclear sites?

I think, its because there is no threat, other than the managed threat.

And before you think me crazy or a conspiracy theorist, consider that our military industrial complex was urging Kennedy to invoke Operation Northwoods. Do a google search on Operation Northwoods or go here: : Operation Northwoods. (Side note: Kennedy was killed soon after he chose not to implement the plan.) Or consider all the recent historic texts that reveal how FDR knew about Pearl Harbor before it happened and was 'relieved' when it finally happened (His own wife said it) This type of stuff is not out of the question. It must be considered, even if its hard to digest.

Bulldog,

Regardint Tenet, fair enough. I wasn't aware that the CIA had any jurisdiction within the US borders. I am aware that there was sufficient intel to have captured several of the hijackers but the info, as I recall, never made it to the top. In any case, as I further recall, it was info from the FBI, not the CIA and, if I'm not mistaken, there is that problem of the wall of separation between spookdom and law enforcement. It seems to me that that failure really fell mostly with the FBI.

As to the anthrax, okay. As I say, it certainly sounds like a disgruntled scientist/military personel type. I hope you don't think that Rove had the know-how to have engineered the anthrax affair. I do think that, though very coincidental in time, that it was a coincidence. It had the feel of a unibomber type of vibe only with a different focus for the targets.

Who hid the news item? I mean, you found it. How well could it have been hidden? As for the CIPRO, well, if the US is being targetted by terrorists, and not knowing how many or what type of attacks to expect, I don't find it too surprising that they might want to inoculate against a possible biological agent, whether such an agent ever showed up or not.

Bin Ladins and Papa Bush meeting...I couldn't say. I don't imagine that it had to do with 9/11. Are you suggesting that Usama hasn't really been banished from the rest of the family or that Usama isn't really disgusted with the rest of his family? Do you think that that's just a cover? I would think that, if the meeting with the non-Usama bin Ladins were somehow related to the attacks, the very last place on earth that they would want to be is on US soil at the time of the attack, if for no other reason than to maintain the charade. I mean it's just too darn suspicious, them being in the country at the same time, don't you think? I mean, look how suspicious you are about it. Wasn't that kind of a stupid move if, indeed they knew about the attack?

I don't really know why he opposed the 9/11 commission to begin with. Maybe he felt that it would be a complication/distraction that a nation at war didn't need.

I think that Bush mentions 9/11 every chance he gets because he recognizes that support for his war on terror is slipping. I think many mistake this invocation. He's not saying that Iraq had direct ties to 9/11. He's saying that 9/11 is what changed the focus away from firing missiles at aspirin factories in retaliation for terrorist attacks a la Clinton to intending to eliminate terrorism wherever it is found, including states that support it and Iraq/Saddam certainly was that. It's like "Remember the Alamo!"...a rallying cry, although, as a rallying cry, it doesn't seem to be quite as successful as the Alamo.

I, myself, have been fuming over the border thing, along with many other conservatives. His "guest-worker" non-amnesty program is about as well designed as anything could be to increase illegal emigration in anticipation of its being instituted. Lo and behold, we find out that a poll of illegals caught crossing showed that a large percentage said they were coming across the border because of Bush's amnesty program. Bush didn't like the results of the poll so he tried to shut it down and bury the results. Anyway, he has recently decided to get serious about border patrol. I hope he's serious about it and not just blowing smoke.

Whew, I gotta say, Bulldog, you put together one hell of an argument here. Almost thou hast persuaded me.

Craig,

When I say "they hid the news story on Anthrax", I mean, nobody is reporting on the investigation anymore. The FBI isn't releasing any press releases anymore. And the television never mentions it. Yes, there are some stories out there for people like me who have no life. But most people are too busy to go hunting for the stories. If the television doesnt feed it to people, it may as well be considered 'irrelevant' for the purpose of mass consciousness.

You can be certain if Anthrax was an al-Qaeda operation or an Iraqi operation, it would be front and center in the American media and out of the President's mouth.

How many Americans even know that the anthrax came from a "government insider"? Ask your family and friends where they think it came from. Remember, its perception that matters with these people, not truth.

The people perceive al-Qaeda and/or Iraq, and thats all that matters. Thats sufficient to help fuel a war frenzy. The anthrax story, in my opinion, is the key to opening the door to 9/11. 9/11 hit Americans hard. Waking up to that horrific nightmare was traumatic enough. Then came anthrax, and thats was an ongoing, day by day scare that could effect us all. We were all trying to buy gas masks on Ebay. Anthrax gave us the feeling like the attack was constant. Anthrax is what made us all scared out of our wits. 9/11 + Antrhax = Mass Hysteria and Zero Checks on Power.

Anthrax is what caused Senator Leahy (an anthrax recipient and former critic of the Patriot Act) to vote for the Patriot Act!

These wars are about Oil. Look at who runs our country. Look at where these wars are taking place. Afghanistan (major oil pipeline). Hamid Kharzai (former Unocal bigwig). Iraq (second largest oil reserve in the world).

If you have the time, I strongly suggest you take a look at this. It is 16 pages long, but it is exhaustive, and contains reliable referencing. It is the best timeline of events that I have seen. And it lacks commentary, but the timeline paints the picture on its own.

For the sake of brevity, you can check out this timeline. It is shorter.

Or if you really dont have the patience, this one is even shorter!

I wish I could fail miserably at my job and keep getting promotions!!!

Hey I would be like a manager!!

great post!

I think we have a very similar take on the workings (shortcomings) of the bush administration. Here are a few posts of interest:
http://love-the-exception.blogspot.com/2005/06/frightening-absurdities.html

I've been looking for a promotion, and now I know how to get one.

It is a shameful time to be a Republican Right Now. I truly hope that soon my Republican Friends will feel the love of Christ in their hearts and reach out to the world and start leading by example rather than simply offering up empty rhetoric and the politics of division.

yada yada yada...I wonder how much you bitched during the Clinto years...

Paul,

Actually, I did "bitch" during the Clinton years because the Right was ruthlessly going after a president for lying about a sex act. Yes, it was bad, but not a high crime. They spent millions of dollars on an independent investigation which brought NOTHING back.

Our current president lied for the purpose of sending people to die. Big difference, my friend. Our current president didn't even want to support an investigation of 9/11, then after finally giving in, didn't want to fund it, then he didn't want to cooperate with it. BIG DIFFERENCE.

If ever there was a need for an investigation, it is now. Its certainly at-issue as to whether this president lied for the purpose of going to war. Where is your incredulity? I'm sure you would be pretty pissed if he had a (D) next to his name.

Just wait until history judges this president. You will be embarassed you ever supported this bastard.

Until then...yada yada yada.....

Well you know it starts at the top. Just look at the shrub himself. Talk about 'mediocrity'. He was never the best and the brightest. He was not even the 'chosen son'. He simply happened to be the oldest son. And probably the easiest to be manipulated. Then look at Rove and Cheney. Both hanger-on's who never achieved any kind of personal success, but instead rode into town on someone else's coattails.
Now that they've found themselves in a position to do so they are going to reward as many of their peers as possible.

hey paul I am always bitching.

tracy v - middle managment is for screw ups with to much sneority to get rid of

Great post

We're dealing with an administration that clearly does not believe that they are accountable. They do everything in total secrecy and expect the American people to keep eating it. I am amazed on a daily basis when I see the comparisons between this administration and the start of the takeover of Germany by Hitler. The signs are the same people. First, you create fear in the people by creating an enemy (Hitler burned the Reichstag), then you blame it on someone else. (hmmm...twin towers possibly) Next, you take that fear and run with it. That is the perfect opportunity to change all of the written rules; we know them as the constitution. With that out of the way, you are then capable of continuing to perpetuate the fear propoganda against a false enemy in the name of protecting it's citizens. At that point, you have all the tools at hand to create a police state. (hmmm....National I.D. Cards, Government Camps already built and staffed, Control of the Internet...)
There is a really good documentary out called, I believe, the Blindspot. It is an interview with Hitler's personal secretary, who has since died. She even stated in the doc that most Germans thought he was a babbling idiot and so they paid no attention to him. Most were caught off-guard when everything went down.
Look at it this way, any country in the world, that elects a former presidents son as the current president, is not a democracy. We like to think that we are democratic, but it's past that now-Black Box voting and all.
If you are currently reading this post on a pc (not mac), you know how unsecure pc's are, how they crash, how easy it is to write malicious code and all that. That's the software we're using in the Diebold 'voting machines'. Ha! Talk about manipulating the vote.
Keep it going Bulldog. You're the man!

Tennet got the medal because Bush is trying to buy him off and keep him silent over the Valarie Plame/CIA affair. The CIA is real pissed with the way Bush has been screwing up Iraq and the war on terror. The reason Tennet quit so suddenly (in the middle of the night!) was so he would be free to testify AGAINST Bush and his cabinet.

Read the details HERE.

k.,

That is quite an article.

The Bulldog Manifesto

Regarding Tenet, I think you are being a bit unfair. The perview of the CIA is outside of the USA. Now I realize that the 9/11 people came from outside of the country but they spent a lot of time within the States before 9/11. Their flight training took place within the country. Their casing of airports and planes and flight-crew activities, etc. all took place within the country. The CIA had no jurisdiction over any of these activities. The best chance that we had of foiling the 9/11 plot rested with the FBI, an organization over which Tenet had no influence.

Do I let Tenet off of the hook for 9/11? Not altogether. It's just not nearly so obvious what position the CIA was in to prevent 9/11--well, not to me, anyway. Remember, the CIA and FBI were prevented from sharing information by the so called wall of separation between secret service types and crime prevention types.

Bulldog,

What is your reasoning whereby you conclude that the Anthrax letters were mailed by someone in the Government? Oh, and by the way, the CIA has no jurisdiction within the USA therefore blaming them for failure to resolve the Anthrax case seems particularly inapt. If it was someone in our government, the CIA was nowhere near the investigation.

About Condi, I actually think that she is better off in the State Department. I don't defend her failures, whatever they may be, as National Security Advisor but diplomacy seems to be her metier.

Actually, the Geneva Conventions themselves suggest that the detainees do not qualify for the protections of the Geneva Conventions. That does not make it open season for torture of detainees, which actions I deplore, however, I do think that there is value in exploring every idea concerning gathering intelligence that might prevent another 9/11 or bring those responsible for 9/11 to justice. If that includes discussing torture, I have no problem with that discussion--as long as torture is rejected at the end of that discussion.

As for Gonzalez as a moderate, you might remember his comments concerning one of Bush's nominees. He was said to have called her reasoning about requiring parental consent before a minor may obtain an abortion 'activist'. By 'activist', he did not mean 'Liberal activism' but 'Conservative activism'. Frankly, I think Gonzalez would be a poor choice for the SCOTUS.

Bush does seem to be loyal to a fault and I am not really defending keeping any of these people on or promoting them, for that matter. I just have a predictably different point of view on the whole thing.

Halliburton is totally on it's own, as far as I am concerned. They will need to defend themselves.

Craig,

Check out THIS for my anthrax article.

After the news came out that the anthrax came from an American source, the story went underground, Craig. In the early days of the story, when the story was about al-Qaeda, this was a front page story. But since it has been determined to be home grown, the story and the investigation have been veiled in secrecy.

Here is the Washington Post article about the source of the anthrax spores.

Another interesting article is this one..

Okay, Bulldog, I'm pretty well convinced. What about my other comments?

Craig,

Regarding Tenet, true, when the CIA was set up, it was set up for the purposes of international intelligence. Somewhere along the line, however, the CIA has become very involved in intelligence matters that venture into the United States yet have international implications.

From Wikipedia:
"While collection of foreign intelligence on U.S. citizenry has always been prohibited by its charter, the restrictions and oversight of the 1970s cut into the CIA's intelligence-gathering powers at home. Any such operation against a U.S. citizen must fall within its counterespionage or antiterrorist purview and requires senior approval, up to and including the Director of National Intelligence or the Attorney General for certain operations."

Because terrorism is considered an international phenomenon, the CIA gets involved in domestic investigations so long as they relate to counterterrorism.

As the head of the CIA, I think its only fair to put some blame on Tenet. The truth is, we had the data that could have stopped 9/11 before 9/11. For whatever reason (negligence, or perhaps inentional), the data was not acted upon.

The only person who ever apologized for 9/11 was counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke, yet he was the only person urging Bush to take terrorism more seriously prior to 9/11.

As for Condi, I dont trust her at all. I'm glad she is out of NSA, but I dont like her in State. I'd prefer her in a position on Energy. Heck, I'd say the only qualification any of the Bush cadre have is knowledge of Big Oil.

As for Gonzalez. I'm glad he said what you say he said. Thats refreshing. But I dont think there is any room on our Supreme Court for somebody who condoned torture. I cannot think of anything more repugnant to American ideals than torturing a human being, regardless of their crimes.

About the anthrax, dont you find it remarkable that the Anthrax letters were mailed one week after 9/11. Dont you find it remarkable that they were sent, for the most part, to two democrat senators and parties whom the extreme right had called out as "liberal media "? What about the fact that the anthrax attack had to be planned well in advance of 9/11? Was it just coincidence? Opportunism? Or perhaps, something in concert?

Why have they hidden this news item? Why was the White House put on CIPRO on 9/11, two weeks before the nation even knew about the anthrax attack, and one week before it was mailed? Why was Bush's dad meeting with the Bin Laden family on the morning of 9/11? Why did Bush do everything possible to stop a 9/11 commission?

Why does Bush invoke 9/11 every chance he gets? Why aren't they doing the things that would actually protect us from terrorism? Protecting the borders? Investing in the Coast Guard (rather than taking away funding) Protecting nuclear sites?

I think, its because there is no threat, other than the managed threat.

And before you think me crazy or a conspiracy theorist, consider that our military industrial complex was urging Kennedy to invoke Operation Northwoods. Do a google search on Operation Northwoods or go here: : Operation Northwoods. (Side note: Kennedy was killed soon after he chose not to implement the plan.) Or consider all the recent historic texts that reveal how FDR knew about Pearl Harbor before it happened and was 'relieved' when it finally happened (His own wife said it) This type of stuff is not out of the question. It must be considered, even if its hard to digest.

Bulldog,

Regardint Tenet, fair enough. I wasn't aware that the CIA had any jurisdiction within the US borders. I am aware that there was sufficient intel to have captured several of the hijackers but the info, as I recall, never made it to the top. In any case, as I further recall, it was info from the FBI, not the CIA and, if I'm not mistaken, there is that problem of the wall of separation between spookdom and law enforcement. It seems to me that that failure really fell mostly with the FBI.

As to the anthrax, okay. As I say, it certainly sounds like a disgruntled scientist/military personel type. I hope you don't think that Rove had the know-how to have engineered the anthrax affair. I do think that, though very coincidental in time, that it was a coincidence. It had the feel of a unibomber type of vibe only with a different focus for the targets.

Who hid the news item? I mean, you found it. How well could it have been hidden? As for the CIPRO, well, if the US is being targetted by terrorists, and not knowing how many or what type of attacks to expect, I don't find it too surprising that they might want to inoculate against a possible biological agent, whether such an agent ever showed up or not.

Bin Ladins and Papa Bush meeting...I couldn't say. I don't imagine that it had to do with 9/11. Are you suggesting that Usama hasn't really been banished from the rest of the family or that Usama isn't really disgusted with the rest of his family? Do you think that that's just a cover? I would think that, if the meeting with the non-Usama bin Ladins were somehow related to the attacks, the very last place on earth that they would want to be is on US soil at the time of the attack, if for no other reason than to maintain the charade. I mean it's just too darn suspicious, them being in the country at the same time, don't you think? I mean, look how suspicious you are about it. Wasn't that kind of a stupid move if, indeed they knew about the attack?

I don't really know why he opposed the 9/11 commission to begin with. Maybe he felt that it would be a complication/distraction that a nation at war didn't need.

I think that Bush mentions 9/11 every chance he gets because he recognizes that support for his war on terror is slipping. I think many mistake this invocation. He's not saying that Iraq had direct ties to 9/11. He's saying that 9/11 is what changed the focus away from firing missiles at aspirin factories in retaliation for terrorist attacks a la Clinton to intending to eliminate terrorism wherever it is found, including states that support it and Iraq/Saddam certainly was that. It's like "Remember the Alamo!"...a rallying cry, although, as a rallying cry, it doesn't seem to be quite as successful as the Alamo.

I, myself, have been fuming over the border thing, along with many other conservatives. His "guest-worker" non-amnesty program is about as well designed as anything could be to increase illegal emigration in anticipation of its being instituted. Lo and behold, we find out that a poll of illegals caught crossing showed that a large percentage said they were coming across the border because of Bush's amnesty program. Bush didn't like the results of the poll so he tried to shut it down and bury the results. Anyway, he has recently decided to get serious about border patrol. I hope he's serious about it and not just blowing smoke.

Whew, I gotta say, Bulldog, you put together one hell of an argument here. Almost thou hast persuaded me.

Craig,

When I say "they hid the news story on Anthrax", I mean, nobody is reporting on the investigation anymore. The FBI isn't releasing any press releases anymore. And the television never mentions it. Yes, there are some stories out there for people like me who have no life. But most people are too busy to go hunting for the stories. If the television doesnt feed it to people, it may as well be considered 'irrelevant' for the purpose of mass consciousness.

You can be certain if Anthrax was an al-Qaeda operation or an Iraqi operation, it would be front and center in the American media and out of the President's mouth.

How many Americans even know that the anthrax came from a "government insider"? Ask your family and friends where they think it came from. Remember, its perception that matters with these people, not truth.

The people perceive al-Qaeda and/or Iraq, and thats all that matters. Thats sufficient to help fuel a war frenzy. The anthrax story, in my opinion, is the key to opening the door to 9/11. 9/11 hit Americans hard. Waking up to that horrific nightmare was traumatic enough. Then came anthrax, and thats was an ongoing, day by day scare that could effect us all. We were all trying to buy gas masks on Ebay. Anthrax gave us the feeling like the attack was constant. Anthrax is what made us all scared out of our wits. 9/11 + Antrhax = Mass Hysteria and Zero Checks on Power.

Anthrax is what caused Senator Leahy (an anthrax recipient and former critic of the Patriot Act) to vote for the Patriot Act!

These wars are about Oil. Look at who runs our country. Look at where these wars are taking place. Afghanistan (major oil pipeline). Hamid Kharzai (former Unocal bigwig). Iraq (second largest oil reserve in the world).

If you have the time, I strongly suggest you take a look at this. It is 16 pages long, but it is exhaustive, and contains reliable referencing. It is the best timeline of events that I have seen. And it lacks commentary, but the timeline paints the picture on its own.

For the sake of brevity, you can check out this timeline. It is shorter.

Or if you really dont have the patience, this one is even shorter!

Add a comment

 
All Bark. No Bite.
The Bulldog Manifesto


Headlines from the Impeachment 

Blogosphere
Provided by First Sustainable
Add this box to your site
Add your feed to this box




The Dog House